This invention is generally directed to an apparatus and method for marking produce, i.e. fruits and vegetables, with identifying marks using initially "ink free" techniques. More particularly, the invention contemplates a produce marking system utilizing initially "ink free" techniques ranging from lasers to dot matrix printers. The present invention provides a less expensive, inventory free, ecologically friendly, rapidly changeable option to packers for replacement of currently employed adhesive label systems which often clog packing line equipment, juice screens and display cases or may inadvertently be eaten by the consumer.
The Grocers Association requires that a number, called a price look-up ("P.L.U.") number, is put on all types of fruits, especially citrus, and some types of vegetables which are sold in a loose state, as opposed to bagged or plastic-wrapped produce. The Grocers Association requires this number so it can merchandise different sizes and types of produce. The P.L.U. number represents different varieties, sizes (normally two; large, small) and geographic growing areas within the United States. Further labeling may be undertaken by an individual packer to identify brand names or specific growing region, for example, Indian River grapefruit, Vidalia onion. Some states mandate that the "country of origin" be noted, for example, tomatoes from Mexico, apples from Chile. The P.L.U. marking requirement is not limited to the United States.
P.L.U. numbers allow a check-out clerk to identify fruits and vegetables quickly and easily. A store may have the P.L.U. numbers and the associated identifying data entered into a computer. To access the data, the clerk need only read the number on the produce and enter it into the computer.
Prior to the usage of P.L.U. numbers, grocers often lost money from giveaways that resulted from mixed sizes or types of produce. The check-out clerk was always told to err on the side of the customer. This mispricing happened often which resulted in large losses for the grocery stores. The P.L.U. number aids the check-out clerk from mispricing the produce that looks the same but has a different quality value. This minimizes loss of money to a grocer due to "giveaways" that result from mixed sizes or types, and minimizes time at the check-out counter which have previously resulted from price checks. The usage of the P.L.U. numbers also aids in inventory control which previously had been a problem area.
To mark the produce with the P.L.U. number, typically, a small adhesive label is placed on the produce at the packinghouse by the packer. Labels, however, are costly and complex to manufacture and attach to the produce. The labels are expensive because the packer must purchase large inventories of labels to run different types of produce on the same packing line. There must be a 90-95% success rate of the label adhering to the produce and presently the labels are only achieving 80-85%, not including what falls off after labeling in the packinghouse and the grocery store. In addition, the labels must be stored in a dry, cool environment in a room built with HVAC controls.
Adhesive labels present several other problems, for example, when the packer changes the type of produce they are packing, the packer must physically change all of the labels so that the correct label is eventually attached to the produce which requires downtime and manpower to set up. The prior art adhesive label systems have a high operational maintenance cost. A person must be regularly assigned to the label machine to keep it operational. The labeler requires the spools of labels to be replaced when empty, and there is a need to unplug the applicator when it becomes clogged with labels.
The adhesive on the labels also has the tendency to gum up on the labeler machine, and be deposited on the belts, rollers, and any other associated machinery. These stray labels have to be cleaned from the equipment everyday. Over time, the adhesive builds up on the equipment after the stray labels are continually removed. Furthermore, when processing plants receive labeled fruit to process, i.e. squeezing fruit to make juice, the labels may clog the extractors. This requires down-time due to cleaning and maintenance.
Furthermore, the adhesive labels are not a "green" product. There is garbage from the adhesive backing along with the packaging of the label rolls. The labels use adhesive for label application, as well as using more energy for special storage.
Additionally, with the current prior art adhesive label system, it is not possible to make on-line P.L.U. number changes. Therefore, at least two rows of labelers are required to put down the proper adhesive label on the produce. For example, if large and small produce are being distinguished with P.L.U. adhesive labels, then two labelers must be used in line to apply the proper label to the produce.
In the grocery store, adhesive labels come off of the produce and sometimes stick to the wrong produce or the floor or the bins in which the produce is stored. This necessitates the need for regular cleaning of the adhesive labels.
With regard to consumers, many consumers do not care for adhesive labels. Some customers do not like having to peel the label off the produce. In addition, customers sometimes inadvertently eat or bite into the adhesive label.
Applicant believes that attempts have been made to directly mark produce with an ink jet printer using edible ink. This type of marking system, however, requires use of an ink which is not sufficiently permanent and smudges.
Additionally, lasers have been used to mark foodstuffs, such as that disclosed in German Patent No. DE 3836821. This type of laser marking system for foodstuffs employs the use of a scanning mask (a stencil of the desired mark) which controls the extent of the contact of the laser light beam on the foodstuff and thus, is an inefficient system. The prior art masking systems were not concerned with direct marking on the delicate, extremely sensitive skin of a perishable product such as fruits and vegetables.
The success of any labeling that would be acceptable to grocers and consumers depends on a several criteria. First, the label has to be easy to read so as not to slow down the check-out clerk when checking the P.L.U. number. Second, the label must have at least a 90-95% success rate of being labeled. Third, the label must be low in cost to the grocer and to the consumer. Fourth, the label must be visually acceptable to the consumer. Fifth and finally, the marking system must not damage the produce.
The present invention is intended to present a novel produce marking system which uses initially "ink free" techniques to provide a label on produce which meets these criteria. In addition, the present invention is intended to overcome or minimize known and inherent problems in prior art produce marking techniques.